Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Expert Knowledge and Its Application in Landscape Ecology pp 153–171Cite as

Using Expert Knowledge Effectively: Lessons from Species Distribution Models for Wildlife Conservation and Management

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

The spatial and temporal relationships between organisms and their environments are fundamental to both theoretical and applied ecology. The heterogeneous distribution of organisms in space and time will influence most ecological relationships, including predation, competition, and resource use, and, ultimately, population dynamics and evolution (Turchin 1996). Recognizing that the science and practice of ecology involves a consideration of spatial processes, much recent research has focused on formally representing and quantifying the spatial and temporal relationships between organisms and their environments (Morales et al. 2010). One prominent area of investigation for landscape ecologists has been the development of statistical models and associated analyses that empirically represent those relationships (Elith and Leathwick 2009). This set of methods has become known as “species distribution models” (SDMs). Guisan and Thuiller (2005) define SDMs as “… empirical models relating field observations to environmental predictor variables, based on statistically or theoretically derived response surfaces.”

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Al-Awadhi SA, Garthwaite PH (2006) Quantifying expert opinion for modeling fauna habitat distributions. Computational Stat 21:121–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allouche O, Tsor A, Kadmon R (2006), Assessing the accuracy of species distribution models: prevalence, kappa and the true skill statistic (TSS). J Appl Ecol 43:1223–1232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bender LC, Roloff GJ, Haufer JB (1996) Evaluating confidence intervals for habitat suitability models. Wildl Soc Bull 24:347–352

    Google Scholar 

  • Bio AMF, De Becker P, De Bie E, et al (2002) Prediction of plant species distribution in lowland river valleys in Belgium: modeling species response to site conditions. Biodivers Conserv 11:2189–2216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyce MS (2010) Presence-only data, pseudo-absences, and other lies about habitat selection. Ideas Ecol Evol 3:26–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowman J, Robitaille JF (2005) An assessment of expert-based marten habitat models used for forest management in Ontario. For Chron 81:801–807

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks RP (1997) Improving habitat suitability models. Wildl Soc Bull 25:163–167

    Google Scholar 

  • Brotons L, Thuiller W, Araujo MB, Hirzel AH (2004) Presence-absence versus presence-only modelling methods for predicting bird habitat suitability. Ecography 27:437–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgman MA, Breininger DR, Duncan BW, Ferson S (2001) Setting reliability bounds on habitat suitability indices. Ecol Appl 11:70–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chetkiewicz CLB, Boyce MS (2009) Use of resource selection functions to identify conservation corridors. J Appl Ecol 46:1036–1047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clevenger AP, Wierzchowski J, Chruszcz B, Gunson K (2002) GIS-generated, expert-based models for identifying wildlife habitat linkages and planning for mitigation passages. Conserv Biol 16:503–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowling RM, Pressey RL, Sims-Castley R, et al (2003) The expert or the algorithm? Comparison of priority conservation areas in the Cape Floristic Region identified by park managers and reserve selection software. Biol Conserv 112:147–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crosetto M, Tarantola S (2001) Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis: tools for GIS-based model implementation. Internat J Geogr Inf Sci 15:415–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Czembor, CA, Vesk, PA (2009) Incorporating between-expert uncertainty into state-and-transition simulation models for forest restoration. For Ecol Manage 259:165–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doswald N, Zimmerman F, Breitenmoser U (2007) Testing expert groups for a habitat suitability model for the lynx Lynx lynx in the Swiss Alps. Wildl Biol 13:430–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EBA Engineering (2002a) Ecosystem mapping with wildlife interpretations to support oil and gas pre-tenure planning in the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area—wildlife report. British Columbia Ministry of Energy & Mines, Fort St. John

    Google Scholar 

  • EBA Engineering (2002b) Predictive ecosystem mapping (PEM) with wildlife habitat interpretations to support oil and gas pre-tenure planning in the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area. British Columbia Ministry of Energy & Mines, Fort St. John

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards W, Barron FH (1994) Smarts and smarter: improved simple methods for multi-attribute utility measurement. Organ Behav Hum Dec 60:306–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elith J, Graham C (2009) Do they? How do they? WHY do they differ? On finding reasons for differing performances of species distribution models. Ecography 32:66–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elith J, Leathwick JR (2009) Species distribution models: ecological explanations and prediction across space and time. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 40:677–697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fielding AH, Bell JF (1997) A review of methods for the measurement of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models. Environ Conserv 24:38–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franklin J (2010) Mapping species distributions: spatial inference and prediction. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Gal T, Stewart T, Hanne, T (eds) (1999) Multicriteria decision making—advances in MCDM models, algorithms, theory, and applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell

    Google Scholar 

  • Grech A, Marsh H (2008) Rapid assessment of risks to a mobile marine mammal in an ecosystem-scale marine protected area. Conserv Biol 22:711–720

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gu W, Swihart RK (2004) Absent or undetected? Effects of non-detection of species occurrence on wildlife-habitat models. Biol Conserv 116:195–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guisan A, Thuiller, W (2005) Predicting species distribution: offering more than simple habitat models. Ecol Lett 8:993–1009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guisan A, Zimmermann, NE (2000) Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecol Model 135:147–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hebblewhite M, Haydon DT (2010) Building the bridge between animal movement and population dynamics. Phil Trans Roy Soc B 365:2303–2312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiddink JG, Jennings S, Kaiser MJ (2007) Assessing and predicting the relative ecological impacts of disturbance on habitats with different sensitivities. J Appl Ecol 44:405–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurley MV, Rapaport EK, Johnson CJ (2007) A spatial analysis of moose–vehicle collisions in Mount Revelstoke and Glacier National Parks, Canada. Alces 43:79–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurley MV, Rapaport EK, Johnson CJ (2009) Utility of expert-based knowledge for predicting wildlife-vehicle collisions. J Wildl Manage 73:278–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CJ, Boyce MS, Case RL, et al (2005) Quantifying the cumulative effects of human developments: a regional environmental assessment for sensitive Arctic wildlife. Wildl Monogr 160:1–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CJ, Gillingham, MP (2004) Mapping uncertainty: sensitivity of wildlife habitat ratings to variation in expert opinion. J Appl Ecol 41:1032–1041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CJ, Gillingham, MP (2005) An evaluation of mapped species distribution models used for conservation planning. Environ Conserv 32:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CJ, Gillingham, MP (2008) Sensitivity of species distribution models to error, bias, and model design: An application to resource selection functions for woodland caribou. Ecol Model 213:143–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CJ, Nielsen SE, Merrill, EH, et al (2006) Resource selection functions based on use-availability data: theoretical motivation and evaluation methods. J Wildl Manage 70:347–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CJ, Seip DR, Boyce MS (2004) A quantitative approach to conservation planning: Using resource selection functions to identify important habitats for mountain caribou. J Appl Ecol 41:238–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karl JW, Heglund PJ, Garton EO (2000) Sensitivity of species habitat-relationship model performance to factors of scale. Ecol Appl 10:1690–1705

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhnert PM, Martin TG, Griffiths SP (2010) A guide to eliciting and using expert knowledge in Bayesian ecological models. Ecol Lett 13:900–914

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis-Beck MS, Bryman A, Lia TF (eds) (2004) The Sage encyclopedia of social science research methods. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDougall C, Baum F (1997) The Devil’s advocate: a strategy to avoid groupthink and stimulate discussion in focus groups. Qual Health Res 7:532–541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacMillan DC, Marshall K (2006) The Delphi process—an expert-based approach to ecological modelling in data poor environments. Anim Conserv 9:11–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell MS, Zimmerman JW, Powell RA (2002) Test of a habitat suitability index for black bears in the southern Appalachians. Wildl Soc Bull 30:794–808

    Google Scholar 

  • Morales JM, Moorcraft PR, Matthiopoulos J (2010) Building the bridge between animal movement and population dynamics. Philos Trans Roy Soc B 365:2289–2301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mouton AM, De Baets B, Goethals PLM (2009) Knowledge-based versus data-driven fuzzy habitat suitability models for river management. Environ Modell Softw 24:982–993

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray JM, Goldizen AW, O’Leary, et al (2009) How useful is expert opinion for predicting the distribution of a species within and beyond the region of expertise? A case study using brush-tailed rock-wallabies Petrogale penicillata. J Appl Ecol 46:842–851

    Google Scholar 

  • Newbold T, Reader T, Zalat S, El-Gabbas A, Gilbert F (2009) Effect of characteristics of butterfly species on the accuracy of distribution models in an arid environment. Biodivers Conserv 18:3629–3641

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Leary RA, Low-Choy S, Murray JV, et al (2009) Comparison of three expert elicitation methods for logistic regression on predicting the presence of the threatened brush-tailed rock-wallaby Petrogale penicillata. Environmetrics 20:379–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearce JL, Cherry K, Drielsma M (2001) Incorporating expert opinion and fine-scale vegetation mapping into statistical models of faunal distribution. J Appl Ecol 38:412–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pullinger MG, Johnson CJ (2010) Maintaining or restoring connectivity of modified landscapes: evaluating the least-cost path model with multiple sources of ecological information. Landsc Ecol 25:1547–1560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radies D, Coxson D, Johnson CJ, Konwicki K (2009) Predicting canopy macrolichen diversity and abundance within old-growth inland temperate rainforests. For Ecol Manage 259:86–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raxworthy CJ, Martinez-Meyer E, Horning N, et al (2003) Predicting distributions of known and unknown reptile species in Madagascar. Nature 426:837–841

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ready J, Kaschner K, South AB, et al (2010) Predicting the distribution of marine organisms at the global scale. Ecol Model 221:467–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • RIC (1999) British Columbia wildlife habitat ratings standards. V.2.0. Resources Inventory Committee, Wildlife Interpretations Subcommittee, Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Victoria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roloff GJ, Kernohan BJ (1999) Evaluating reliability of habitat suitability index models. Wildlife Soc Bull 27:973–985

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose NA, Burton PJ (2009) Using bioclimatic envelopes to identify temporal corridors in support of conservation planning in a changing climate. For Ecol Manage 258:S64–S74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin ES, Stermer CJ, Boyce WM, Torres SG (2009) Assessment of predictive habitat models for bighorn sheep in California’s Peninsular Range. J Wildl Manage 73:859–869

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorensen T, McLoughlin P, Hervieux D, et al (2008) Determining sustainable levels of cumulative effects for boreal caribou. J Wildl Manage 72:900–905

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland WJ (2006) Predicting the ecological consequences of environmental change: a review of methods. J Appl Ecol 43:599–616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tirpak JM, Jones-Farrand DT, Thompson FR III, et al (2009) Assessing ecoregional-scale habitat suitability index models for priority landbirds. J Wildl Manage 73:1307–1315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turchin P (1996) Fractal analysis of movement: a critique. Ecology 77:2086–2090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1981) Standards for the development of habitat suitability index models. Department of the Interior, Washington, Ecological Services Manual 103

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang XF, Skidmore AK, Melick DR, et al (2006) Mapping non-wood forest product (matsutake mushrooms) using logistic regression and a GIS expert system. Ecol Model 198:208–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Ecosystem Science and Management Program, University of Northern British Columbia, 3333 University Way, Prince George, BC, Canada, V2N 4Z9

    Chris J. Johnson

  2. The Natural Resources Institute, University of Manitoba, 303-70 Dysart Road, Winnipeg, MB, Canada, R3T 2N2

    Michael Hurley

  3. Faculty of Architecture and Planning, School of Planning, Dalhousie University, 1000, Halifax, NS, Canada, B3J 2X4

    Eric Rapaport

  4. School of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania, 78, Hobart, TAS, 7001, Australia

    Michael Pullinger

Authors
  1. Chris J. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Hurley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eric Rapaport
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael Pullinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chris J. Johnson .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Ontario Forest Research Institute, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Queen St. East 1235, Sault Ste. Marie, P6A 2E5, Ontario, Canada

    Ajith H. Perera

  2. Dept. Zoology, Biodiversity & Spatial Information Ctr., North Carolina State University, Raleigh, 27695, North Carolina, USA

    C. Ashton Drew

  3. Fac. Natural Resources &, Environmental Studies, University of Northern British Columbia, University Way 3333, Prince George, V2N 4Z9, British Columbia, Canada

    Chris J. Johnson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Johnson, C.J., Hurley, M., Rapaport, E., Pullinger, M. (2012). Using Expert Knowledge Effectively: Lessons from Species Distribution Models for Wildlife Conservation and Management. In: Perera, A., Drew, C., Johnson, C. (eds) Expert Knowledge and Its Application in Landscape Ecology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-1034-8_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation